The Hot Springs star. (Hot Spings [Hot Springs], Dakota [Dakota Territory, i.e. S.D.]) 1886-189?, 1887-06-17

What coogsssssnan speingss says Abcus
Admission and Divis;on.

w~AsHlNasou. June 1.-THE worn out hut
always interesting question Of the adnlssaon
q Dakota seems likely 70 get early coneidera-
uon u tne next congresss and TO meet WITH
last: M. Springer. Of l1inoia Who was
faifly virulent in his opposition 70 both "a.
mission and division, said . few daye before
his departure to Illinois, that be s6ould mot
oppose the admiration Of the territory ii It
came IN In the proper way. He said further:
l have never been opposed to the admits.
satisfied that she had the reouiste porcistion
and that her financial and business conditione
were satisfactory. The outcry that m bcen
made against me has drowned the detractions
which I made In the question as it appeared
before congress. and I have been charged
with opposing Dakota's interest in . blind
aud 6igoted fashion: What I Was really op-
its admission. The matter Of . division on
the forty.sfxth parallel, or the forty.seventh
standard parallel, or any other line Of that
Kind 10 noneenstcal and purely without logic.
and tue whole thing was based upon . Jealous
feeling existing between north and eouth
Dakota. It had no relation to the question
OF admission whatever. It was ccmented TO
It and always thrust forward with Il in . wsy
that would not ALLOW even the friends Of the
state q division of that question. II the ter.
rttory is, as has been repeatedly stated by
south Dakotaians, too large for 4 single
state, my plan is to
DIVIDE n TERRITORY
by the Missouri river into two parts. or on
some other north and south line, This would
throw the ~unpopulated counties and the great
Sioux reservation together and leave tho well.
settled parts Of the territory to become one
state. When Dakota asks for admission In
this way she will not be refused It. She will
really have the first consideration at the next
congress. As fac as political questions are
concerned, l am not Inclined to think thcy
had any particular weight with our party In
refusing this request of Dakota. The way In
which she came forward aud demanded NOT
only admission but the setting off for this
proposed state of the best part Of the territory.
and leaving the northern portion out, without
consulting with this section in any way
whatever, did not recommend itself to US az
the best way OF doing things. 1t raised an.
tagontsms to begin with, and when we began
to consider this question and refused to make
this division, and to acknowledge the pseudo
state already established aud at once admit ii
before any authorized action of the people,
with Its two senators and two members, into
this last congress, concluded that II was q
little too much, and, of course, were immedi.
ately charged with partisanism. think you
may safely say that Dakota Will have state.
hood granted her at the first session of the
Fiftieth congress.
Whether Mr.. S%pringcr's views mon this
question are based somewhat upon the re.
duced majority In the next congress or upon
a feeling of generosity for the long suffering
territory, enc thing is certain that the next
congress will be prepared to c0ncede Dakota
almost everything that she wants without re.
gard to the views of the distinguished Demo.
rrat from Illinois: There is a feeling that
Dakota has been treated badly. and fhot tho
Democrats will not be able to make thif
enough of a partisan question to hold the
small majority down to a refusal to conside,
her appeal for admission,